back to article Facebook revamps privacy settings (again)

Facing heat from finer-grained privacy settings in Google+, Facebook has revamped the controls account holders use to designate who gets to see their pictures, posts, and other content. Over the coming days, the controls will move from a dedicated settings page to the main profile page, right beside the posts, photos and tags …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
Big Brother

You can't...

... polish a turd.

1
0
404
Bronze badge
Boffin

Why of course you can!

Mythbusters: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yiJ9fy1qSFI

;)

3
1
Silver badge

Polished Poo?

The 'don't show me pics where I'm tagged could be handy if you have a 'friend' or two who takes pics of turds and tags them with your name.

Anyway, several million flies are happy with Faecesbook

(when checking I'd spelt 'faeces' correctly Google had 'facebook' as the next on the list of suggestions)

1
0
Flame

Different day

Different type of turd. Fecal turds can be polished with enough care and effort.

Facebook can not be fixed as it is more similar to diarrhea than solid feces, so it can not be polished, as that would make an even bigger mess than it already is.

0
0
Holmes

Please don't patent this

.... controls "right beside the posts, photos and tags they affect."

Oh this is just so right. "Look at this page here - what don't you want just anyone to see?"

By any chance, is there a "show me the page as others would see it?" "... as friends/group/Khamenei would see it?" (i.e. pick a subset and 'picture' it?)

Did they get some outside usability people to help?

0
1
Trollface

fanbois

So, for all the fanbois that said Facebook had this already.. Facebook seems to disagree

0
3
Silver badge

Oh goody

Another privacy settings fiasco in the making. Of course, in the "upgrade" all our current privacy settings will be reset to their default "opt-out", viewable by all mode, so we'll have to keep an eye on FB for the change so we can log in and re-change all our privacy settings back to our preferred levels again.

Also keep in mind that privacy settings merely mean "what you don't want anyone other than Facebook to see", they don't protect you from Facebook itself. So as always, watch what you put on there. A simple rule of thumb is - if you wouldn't declare it in a police station, don't put it on Facebook.

0
1

Facebook and its ads...

Can fuck off.

1
1
Anonymous Coward

yea! another damn change

I guess I need to log in and verify that my settings are all the way I left them. Considering that my facebook wall doesn't have any pictures on it, or hooks, or paint, or drywall, etc; I'm not sure what I'm hiding from whom.

1
1
Stop

Re: "fanbois" & "Please don't patent this"

Facebook have had the "View as..." option for, I think, about a year now. There's nothing to disagree with, they've just made it more in-your-face.

Privacy Settings -> View Settings -> Preview my Profile

0
1
Silver badge

Heh.

They've had their run.

0
0

Already there

Yes, the functionality is already there, but it's a bugger to get to and not everyone knows it's possible. You have to go Account >> Privacy >> view/edit setting >> Preview Profile.

If they are making it easier to see, edit and use, then that's a good thing.

I will, of course, be checking my settings as soon as the new layout is implemented, just in case they get reset again.

0
1
Bronze badge

I don't see how they'd obtain a legit patent on the act of privacy.

If fb were a government or medical platform, privacy would have to adhere to the USA's labyrinthine HIPAA laws/requirements/regulations. The very database that contains the information would have triggers, scripts, and numerous bits of code that would look at access permissions and other rights prior to displaying or even pulling up information prior to display, just to prevent one permission from bypassing or subverting a pending transaction.

There are very few ways information can be visible, useful, correctionly used, and protective on a limited-size display. Obfuscation or excessively creative tricks to "look different" would only undermine the mandated use and effectiveness of the tools, so the USPTO and other patent offices should NOT be granting patents on the ease-of-use of something demanded by law in the first place. Otherwise, government would be instituting a control gateway on behalf of one company (which may not even be a contractor, say, using Lockheed as an example) to the detriment of others that could find themselves being sued for implementing something that law demands be effective but which a competitor with deep pockets litigates over due to look and feel.

Some things need to be declared as a "no-man's-land/neutral zone"

0
0
This topic is closed for new posts.

Forums